Re: California Brownfields Funding

[Emery Graham <"egraham"@ci.wilmington.de.us>]

What are some of the prevailing perspectives on the involvement of
responsible parties in the brownfields process? What is there beyond the
endless adversarial debates related to litigation. Are there any precedents
for responsible parties, residents, local, state, and federal governments,
insurance companies coming together to reclaim a brownfield?

The actions of the California legislature included responsible parties in
their proposed brownfields budget recommendation. I'd really like to hear
from some folks on this topic. It seems to be the least discussed topic in
the brownfields drama.

Emery

Lenny Siegel wrote:

> On May 19, 1999, the California State Senate Resources Subcommittee of
> the Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review approved a small, but
> conceptually significant Brownfields budget line item. It designated $1
> million for the "identification, development, and publication of a
> Brownfields Priority Site Cleanup List, identification of responsible
> parties, and issuance of cleanup orders where responsible parties have
> been identified." Furthermore, it budgeted an additional $4 million for
> the "cleanup of abandoned brownfield sites and for the establishment of
> a revolving loan fund for loans to public and private entities to assist
> in the cleanup of brownfield sites."
>
> It is my understanding that the funding is likely to be included in the
> final state budget. While $5 million doesn't go far in a state the size
> of California, these budget items establish channels that may permit
> continuing state support for the environmental recovery of brownfields
> sites.
>
> Lenny Siegel
>
> --
>
> Lenny Siegel
> Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight
> c/o PSC, 222B View St., Mountain View, CA 94041
> Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545
> Fax: 650/968-1126
> lsiegel@cpeo.org
> (PLEASE NOTE THAT WE ARE PHASING OUT
> MY OLD E-MAIL ADDRESS: lsiegel@igc.org)
> http://www.cpeo.org